2011-2012 Offseason Thread

[User Name]

If they want to win' date=' they're going to have to break the cap. Their best bet is to continue just breaking it slightly. They've been over it by 5-10 million a year, and it only costs them 2-5 million. In the general scheme of things, that is not a big deal-- especially when we're talking about adding a one-year contract to put it there.[/quote']

 

Which is why they may be waiting for the Theo compensation, although it may come back to bite them in the ass.

 

Let's assume their 5 million offer is the max they can go without going over the cap. If they get 3.5 million for Theo (and it's possible) they could increase their offer to 8 million, which is Oswalt's reported asking price.

 

Also, remaining over the cap even "slightly" is really not advisable. They need to wipe their slate clean.

[iortiz]

Which is why they may be waiting for the Theo compensation, although it may come back to bite them in the ass.

 

Let's assume their 5 million offer is the max they can go without going over the cap. If they get 3.5 million for Theo (and it's possible) they could increase their offer to 8 million, which is Oswalt's reported asking price.

 

Also, remaining over the cap even "slightly" is really not advisable. They need to wipe their slate clean.

 

I do not get it. 5 M is the max without going over the cap and then you supposedly receive 3.5 M from Cubs and pay that money to Oswalt and then you go over it?, doesn't make sense. Besides.. Are 3.5 M the show stopper? Really? I don't think so... Plus some already suggested that they already put 5 M plus incentives (probably those 3 M) on the table for Oswalt.

[User Name]

I do not get it. 5 M is the max without going over the cap and then you supposedly receive 3.5 M from Cubs and pay that money to Oswalt and then you go over it?' date=' doesn't make sense. Besides.. Are 3.5 M the show stopper? Really? I don't think so... Plus some already suggested that they already put 5 M plus incentives (probably those 3 M) on the table for Oswalt.[/quote']

 

The 3.5 million you receive from the Cubs are subtracted from LT calculations. In other words, in that scenario, you sign Oswalt and DO NOT go over the threshold.

[iortiz]

The 3.5 million you receive from the Cubs are subtracted from LT calculations. In other words' date=' in that scenario, you sign Oswalt and DO NOT go over the threshold.[/quote']

 

I see. I didnt know that it worked out that way. The problem now is that there's no timeline to resolve this issue (Ben is not even focused in this, so... I even doubt that this is the strategy.) and in the meantime Oswalt and Jackson are likely signing with somebody else.

[jung]

Going over the LT slightly no longer works as a plan because it now costs you your revenue sharing rebate as well as the rate penalty that you have to pay.

[iortiz]

I see. I didnt know that it worked out that way. The problem now is that there's no timeline to resolve this issue (Ben is not even focused in this' date=' so... I even doubt that this is the strategy.) and in the meantime Oswalt and [b']Jackson[/b] are likely signing with somebody else.

 

One gone.

[a700hitter]

When you look at the moves made by the Sox this off season thus far, I don't know how anyone can conclude that Benny Boy did much of anything. He inherited a team with a few holes. He has filled none of the holes and created a hole at SS.

[Bellhorn04]

Going over the LT slightly no longer works as a plan because it now costs you your revenue sharing rebate as well as the rate penalty that you have to pay.

 

That revenue sharing penalty kicks in in 2013, and it's phased in over 4 years, starting at 25% and going to 100%.

 

The LT threshold increases to 189 million in 2014.

[jung]

According to CBS, Edwin Jackson just signed with the Nationals today

[iortiz]

When you look at the moves made by the Sox this off season thus far' date=' I don't know how anyone can conclude that Benny Boy did much of anything. He inherited a team with a few holes. He has filled none of the holes and created a hole at SS.[/quote']

 

You are a pessimist. Aviles and Punto will platoon the SS. Bard and Aceves are proved SPs, In fact, they will give us 150+ IP and around 4.0 ERA. Bailey is better than Pap and Melancon has Bard's caliber. ohhh, I almost forget... hence Ortiz is a better bet than another SP even if you pay him 12-16 and go over the cap . What are you talking about? :harhar:

[a700hitter]

You are a pessimist. Aviles and Punto will platoon the SS. Bard and Aceves are proved SPs' date=' In fact, they will give us 150+ IP and around 4.0 ERA. Bailey is better than Pap and Melancon has Bard's caliber. ohhh, I almost forget... hence Ortiz is a better bet than another SP even if you pay him 12-16 and go over the cap . What are you talking about? :harhar:[/quote']Ah yes, I am familiar with those arguments. When the season starts, if it stays like this, I'll have to put on my rose colored glasses.

[Palodios]

When you look at the moves made by the Sox this off season thus far' date=' I don't know how anyone can conclude that Benny Boy did much of anything. He inherited a team with a few holes. He has filled none of the holes and created a hole at SS.[/quote']

 

There was a pretty big hole in the bullpen he needed filling, and he took care of that. The team has had serious problems throwing runners out, and he took care of that. Crawford and Kalish's injuries left a big hole in LF, and he took care of that. Last year there was a serious problem with starting pitching depth, and he took care of that. There is one last move that he needs to make, and if he does make that trade, I think he will have done absolutely everything he could have done.

[iortiz]

There was a pretty big hole in the bullpen he needed filling' date=' and he took care of that. The team has had serious problems throwing runners out, and he took care of that. Crawford and Kalish's injuries left a big hole in LF, and he took care of that. Last year there was a serious problem with starting pitching depth, and he took care of that. There is one last move that he needs to make, and if he does make that trade, I think he will have done absolutely everything he could have done.[/quote']

 

and the SS?... Yes, we are a move away, we've been saying that over and over again... the problem is that Jackson is no longer a option and Oswalt is an unlikely option at this point. If we trade for Floyd or somebody else, the trade will cost you one or two top prospects and Floyd trade does not worth top prospects IMO.

[jung]

That revenue sharing penalty kicks in in 2013, and it's phased in over 4 years, starting at 25% and going to 100%.

 

The LT threshold increases to 189 million in 2014.

 

They will have to be below the cap two years running to avoid the loss of the rebate though. Granted. 25% is not as bad a bite as 50% but avoiding it will require that they are under for two years straight. That is the only way to get back to 0% tax rate and get the rebate.

 

So if they go over in 2012 making 2013 the first year under the cap, they will be hit for the cap penalty % rate in 2012, the 25% rebate in 2013 and the 50% rebate in 2014. If they stay under for 2012, 2013 and 2014, they pay no % rate penalty in 2012, 2013 or 2014 and get their 25% rebate in 2013 and their 50% rebate in 2014.

[a700hitter]

There was a pretty big hole in the bullpen he needed filling' date=' and he took care of that. The team has had serious problems throwing runners out, and he took care of that. Crawford and Kalish's injuries left a big hole in LF, and he took care of that. Last year there was a serious problem with starting pitching depth, and he took care of that. There is one last move that he needs to make, and if he does make that trade, I think he will have done absolutely everything he could have done.[/quote']When he inherited the team, Papelbon was his closer and Bard was his 8th inning guy. The hole in the bullpen occurred on his watch. He had Bard in house to fill the closer's role, but he chose to make him a starter, and he still hasn't filled the 8th inning role in my opinion. Until Melancon proves himself, it is my opinion that he will not be close to the weapon that Bard was.

 

Salty will still be the starting catcher and he still will not be able to throw out base stealers.

 

I disagree that the bags of trash he signed constitute depth. Maine would have more use to this team if they hired him as an usher at Fenway. He's shot. Cook is cooked as well. Silva is a mess. Padilla is the only guy that has a possibility of stepping up and he hasn't been healthy in 3 years. It's looking like he has a good shot at being the #5 starter. If that happens, he will not be a depth option.

[Palodios]

and the SS?... Yes' date=' we are a move away, we've been saying that over and over again... the problem is that Jackson is no longer a option and Oswalt is an unlikely option at this point. If we trade for Floyd or somebody else, the trade will cost you one or two top prospects and Floyd trade does not worth top prospects IMO.[/quote']

 

Lannan seems like a great fit right now.

[a700hitter]

Lannan seems like a great fit right now.

The guy will get eaten alive in the ALE. His stuff is substandard.

[Bellhorn04]

The guy will get eaten alive in the ALE. His stuff is substandard.

 

His numbers look pretty comparable to Jackson's.

[Palodios]

The guy will get eaten alive in the ALE. His stuff is substandard.

 

I'd rather a guy with substandard stuff who gets results than a guy with elite stuff with poor results (Edwin Jackson). Lannan has a better career ERA+ than Jackson. The options aren't good, and I'm not suggesting he'll be great, or even good. But if he can give some innings that aren't completely terrible, that's all I'm asking for right now.

[Palodios]

His numbers look pretty comparable to Jackson's.

 

I noticed the same thing.

[jung]

This is just opinion but I think the Sox interest in Oswalt is not what it once was if it was ever very great to begin with. I am not even sure they would be that interested in him at the $5-6M they appear to have offered him earlier although that would be a steal. I think they and other baseball professionals (which I am not obviously) think there is some downside to Oswalt that is driving their offers south to places that Oswalt finds unattractive.

[iortiz]

I'd rather a guy with substandard stuff who gets results than a guy with elite stuff with poor results (Edwin Jackson). Lannan has a better career ERA+ than Jackson. The options aren't good' date=' and I'm not suggesting he'll be great, or even good. But if he can give some innings that aren't completely terrible, that's all I'm asking for right now.[/quote']

 

A substandard guy will give you results, and an elite guy guy will give you poor results? I do not buy this Pal.

[a700hitter]

I'd rather a guy with substandard stuff who gets results than a guy with elite stuff with poor results (Edwin Jackson). Lannan has a better career ERA+ than Jackson. The options aren't good' date=' and I'm not suggesting he'll be great, or even good. But if he can give some innings that aren't completely terrible, that's all I'm asking for right now.[/quote']Have you seen the guy pitch? My recollection is that the guy is a soft tosser. Maybe I am remembering wrong, but he stuff isn't impressive. If we wanted a guy who knew how to pitch but couldn't throw hard, we should have activated Kevin Millwood last August.

[iortiz]

If they are like the same... why would The Nats want to get rid of him? are 5M the real problem for them?.

[Palodios]

If they are like the same... why would The Nats want to get rid of him? are 5M the real problem for them?.

 

Big name recognition, and innings probably. Edwin Jackson is a very mediocre pitcher, who asked for outrageous things this offseason. He does have potential to be much better, but he hasn't filled that potential.

[jung]

So is there something about Lannan that is not really in the stats?

 

The Nationals just beat him in arbitration so they have him at $5M or something like that. CBS included in its report on Jaxkson that the numbers for Jackson are somewhere north of $8M for the one year deal. Why would they want Jackson at $8M and want to part with Lannan at $5M at the same time?

[a700hitter]

A substandard guy will give you results' date=' and an elite guy guy will give you poor results? I do not buy this Pal.[/quote']Lannan's results against the Phillies for his career has been 2 wins 12 losses and a 5.79 ERA. I've seen this guy a lot. I was rooting for him, because he is from LI, but he doesn't have what the Sox need.

[a700hitter]

So is there something about Lannan that is not really in the stats?

 

The Nationals just beat him in arbitration so they have him at $5M or something like that. CBS included in its report on Jaxkson that the numbers for Jackson are somewhere north of $8M for the one year deal. Why would they want Jackson at $8M and want to part with Lannan at $5M at the same time?

Lannan can't break a pane of glass.

[jung]

A left handed junk baller in Fenway that is kinda' mediocre....Yikes!

 

Ball slowly makes its way to home plate....quickly makes it way to the Mass Pike.

 

Even though you have to accept some compromises for the kind of money we are talking about Lannan making, that does seem like it would be a tough fit for the Sox.

[iortiz]

Big name recognition' date=' and innings probably. Edwin Jackson is a very mediocre pitcher, who asked for outrageous things this offseason. He does have potential to be much better, but he hasn't filled that potential.[/quote']

 

Jackson is a mediocre pitcher? really?, when I take a look at Jackson's numbers the last four years he has a sub 4 ERA and over 190 IP+ per year. Also, He has pitched in the AL, he put with DET a 3.6 ERA and 263 IP, regardless he is still young. What are you talking about?

 

He is young. He is healthy. He is solid. He has an interesting upside. He is in his prime. He was exactly what we needed.

 

I'm not saying that he deserves what Boras was asking but he is a legit 10M/Y pitcher.